Posted on 02/01/2016 12:52:20 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
AMES, Iowa - Rep. Steve King , an Iowa Republican and Ted Cruz supporter, says Donald Trump bought his endorsements. Trump recently received high profile endorsements from Maricopa County Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, and Liberty University president Jerry Falwell, Jr.
King reiterated his statement about the endorsements to the Daily Caller on Saturday during a Cruz rally at the Gateway Hotel and stressed that he "knows things."
"He has, from a regular person's perspective, unlimited resources and he's willing to use whatever access he has in order to get the endorsements that he wants," King explained.
"Among those are the assets that we would naturally think of, including the attraction that might be for, oh who knows, a reality TV show, a job in the Trump machine," he said.
King added: "There's fame and fortune, and there's also the fear factor of retribution, which Donald Trump has not been shy about delivering against people. So all of that affects a person's judgment under those circumstances."
The conservative Iowa congressman would not get specific, but would only say, "I know things, but I'm saying what is appropriate, so that people will know enough, and I'm wanting to keep this on as high a plane as I can, but I don't think my conscience can allow me from not saying anything."
Exactly.
The confusion is in your head or you are another one of the many around here that believe our constitution is a living document and it means whatever you want it to mean. In 1790 Cruz would not have even been considered a citizen of the USA. Did that get thru? Not even a citizen! Now how you go from not even a citizen to a natural born citizen (NBC) as the founders considered NBC is quite the mental feat.
Cruz is a naturalized citizen. The 1934 Naturalization Act (and follow up legislation) conferred citizenship on Cruz. If a Naturalization Act confers your citizenship you are not a natural born citizen. This is not rocket science. No legislation confers citizenship to a natural born citizen. Here is a question for you. My parents were US citizens I was born in the USA, what law makes me a citizen?
The son of a Cuban, born in Canada to an American mothers is not a natural born citizen if you go by original intent. Not even close.
Cruz's mother = American.
And Cruz's father... [Let's unpack that a bit]
"....But look closer at the bolder portion. It never says that the father has to be a citizen of the United States at the time the child is born. All it says is that citizenship "shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States." It is indisputable that Rafael Cruz was in the United States for a period of time prior to both Ted's birth and his marriage to native born American citizen Eleanor Elizabeth Darragh Wilson in 1969. He fled Cuba in 1957 at the age of 18, arriving in Texas. There, he attended the University of Texas, graduating with a degree in mathematics in 1961. He even married his first wife there, Julia Ann Garza, in 1959. They later divorced, but not before he had two daughters with her. He was also granted political asylum in 1961 upon his graduation from UT."....
You’re welcome
I was hoping to find some truth behind all the emotional smoke screens and things are much clearer now.
Prior to the 1934 Naturalization Act a women could not confer her citizenship to her child. But it gets worst for Cruz. Until the mid late 1800's a women citizenship was determined by her husband. So in 1790 an American woman that married a Cuban became a Cuban citizen. that is why the 1790s' legislation talks about the father not the mother. Its the father that is conferring citizenship not the mother. So if we are going by original intent had Baby Ted been born in 1790 little Ted was Cuban by blood and Canadian by soil.
Now how yall turn that into a natural born American citizen is something just just do not get. The only way one can do that is to claim that the constitution does not say what it plainly says. IE living document.
This is the difference between actual fact by direct ACTION and opponent supporters’ opinion hell-bent on demonize a man’s opinion about Kelo.
Trump offered way over what the ‘widow’ actually ended up getting. She chose to gamble - in a city known for gambling.
BTW the 1790 legislation was repelled in 1795 the new legislation authored by James Madison (you know, the guy that wrote the constitution) removed the “shall be consider a natural born citizen” and replaced that with “shall be consider a citizen”.
You/re very welcome.
Yeah...I was just thinking the same thing and have that same "hmmm" as you do.
Adding Trump to the campaign has been like pouring in a bucket-full of chlorine to shock treat a swimming pool full of mucky, algae-green water.
It really stirred things up at first, but has been working steadily ever since clearing the water.
It's embarrassing that pool has been such a mess for so long...I mean, I haven't seen the sides or the bottom in years.
As it is now, I'm as amazed by what all has been hidden in/by the muck as I am by the power of that bucket-full of chlorine!
It'll be great to swim in the pool again! We should have done this a long time ago.
The irony of the widow’s position is that she could have beaten Trump at his own game.
Instead of taking money, she could have negotiated for points in the Trump casino....and had more money than she ever dreamed of rolling in.
Are we over th demise of the Scott Walker campaign, finally?
A man that will willingly tell you his opinion based on his own experience and knowledge that acts within the law is more trustworthy to me than an ankle biting dissembler looking for an edge in a contest they aren’t equipped to address forthrightly.
;-)
Will be such a blessing and treat to have the DC cesspool chlorinated and disinfected, won’t it?
I fail to see what the majority thinks as a reason to vote one way or another.
I thought Stephen King was a writer of scary novels, not political satire..
I hear tell that the congressman still beats his wife, but I wouldn't say that in front of a microphone.
Slander: the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person’s reputation.
I have heard him at least one slanderous statements using that definition.
Him = Trump
(For clarification)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.